Homeless encampments aren’t good for anyone, especially the residents. Politicians on both sides are starting to catch on. A bipartisan coalition of state politicians is seeking to overturn a slew of lower-court decisions that “have protected the civil rights of homeless individuals” (translated: have prevented the use of executive force to remove residents from homeless encampments). As reported by the New York Times:
How did we get those lower-court decisions in the first place? It seems to me they arose primarily from misplaced compassion. The oft-used narrative persuades a gentle heart: “They have nowhere else to go; can’t they at least stay somewhere without being forcefully removed?” The reality is a bit more complicated, as evidenced by the experience of Portland:
Comments